ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2024
Meta‑analysis of the efficacy of venetoclax and azacitidine combination therapy and azacitidine monotherapy for treating acute myeloid leukemia.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Autophagy and Lipid Metabolism as a Therapeutic Target for Overcoming Drug Resistance in Acute Myeloid Leukemia.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study aimed to compare the efficacy of combination therapy with venetoclax and azacitidine with that of azacytidine monotherapy in the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Weipu Database, Wanfang Digital Periodicals, Sinomed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were searched for publications on the treatment of AML with venetoclax combined with azacitidine or with azacitidine monotherapy. A total of 5,271 relevant studies were retrieved, of which 10 were included. Literature quality was evaluated according to the Cochrane systematic review methodology, and data were extracted for meta-analysis using Review Manager 5.4. The combination of venetoclax and azacitidine demonstrated greater overall efficacy than azacitidine monotherapy for AML treatment. Notably, combination therapy resulted in a higher frequency of complete remission. By contrast, combined treatment and monotherapy showed no significant differences in partial remission, whereas there was a statistically significant decrease in the frequency of no remission in the combination therapy group compared with in the monotherapy group. The results also revealed a significantly higher incidence of adverse reactions when venetoclax and azacitidine were combined in the treatment of AML compared with the observed rates in response to azacitidine monotherapy. Moreover, subgroup analyses showed that no statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding adverse events, including hypokalemia and liver insufficiency. In conclusion, the combination of venetoclax and azacitidine was more effective than azacitidine alone, and had a good clinical application value in the treatment of AML. Although some adverse reactions occurred in response to the combination therapy, they did not significantly affect the prognosis of AML. To better evaluate the efficacy and safety of this treatment regimen, multicenter clinical studies with larger sample sizes are required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.